Open AccessThe Mediating Role of Organizational Dissent in the Relationship Between Perceived Organizational Justice and Turnover Intention: Evidence from the Technology Sector
View Full Article|
Download PDFAbstract:
This study examines the influence of perceived organizational justice on employees’ turnover intention, with a focus on the mediating role of organizational dissent. It aims to identify the key factors contributing to turnover intention within the technology sector and to explore the interplay between organizational justice and organizational dissent in shaping this outcome. A quantitative approach was employed, with data gathered through surveys administered to white-collar employees working in technology companies in Istanbul. The study sample comprised 402 participants. The findings reveal an inverse relationship between perceived organizational justice and turnover intention, indicating that lower perceptions of organizational justice correlate with higher turnover intention. Additionally, organizational dissent was found to significantly impact turnover intention, with perceived organizational justice acting as a mediator in this relationship. The results underscore the critical role of organizational justice in fostering job satisfaction and employee commitment, thereby reducing turnover intention in the technology sector. These findings are consistent with existing literature on the relationship between organizational justice and turnover intention, offering valuable insights into the factors influencing employee retention in high-tech industries. The implications for organizational management are discussed, particularly in terms of the importance of promoting fairness and addressing dissent in order to retain talent within technology firms.1. Introduction
The subject of this research is to examine the effect of perceived organizational justice on turnover intention in the technology sector and the mediating role of organizational dissent in this relationship. Organizational justice refers to employees’ perception that they are treated fairly in the workplace and is defined by three main dimensions: distributive justice, procedural justice, and interactional justice (Colquitt, 2001). Turnover intention refers to the willingness of employees to leave their current jobs (Lind & Tyler, 1988). Organizational dissent, on the other hand, represents employees’ oppositional behaviors and attitudes towards organizational practices.
Perceived organizational justice can influence employees’ job satisfaction and turnover intention (Spector, 1997). It has been suggested that in cases where job satisfaction is high, employees’ job performance may increase, while their turnover intention decreases. Furthermore, research in the technology sector indicates that organizational dissent may play a mediating role in the relationship between perceived organizational justice and turnover intention (Cropanzano & Wright, 2001). Organizational justice encompasses employees’ perceptions of fair treatment in the workplace. These perceptions are examined in three main dimensions: distributive justice (fair distribution of wages and rewards), procedural justice (fairness of decision-making processes), and interactional justice (fair communication with employees) (Colquitt, 2001). In cases where the perception of organizational justice is low, employees’ job satisfaction decreases, and their turnover intention increases (Spector, 1997).
Turnover intention refers to employees’ tendencies to leave their current jobs. Studies in the literature indicate that employees with high turnover intention often have low levels of job satisfaction and organizational commitment (Lind & Tyler, 1988). While many factors influence turnover intention, the effect of perceived organizational justice on this intention is particularly emphasized (Cropanzano & Wright, 2001).
Organizational dissent refers to employees’ opposing attitudes and behaviors towards organizational practices and decisions. This concept is crucial for understanding employees’ negative reactions during organizational change and transformation processes. Organizational dissent can sometimes arise as a response to employees’ perceptions of organizational injustice and includes expressing disagreements or conflicting opinions about organizational practices, policies, and procedures (Kassing, 1998).
Organizational justice refers to individuals’ overall perception of being treated fairly and equitably within an organization. This concept significantly influences employees’ overall job satisfaction, commitment levels, and turnover intention (Colquitt et al., 2015). Organizational justice encompasses various dimensions of fairness that employees use to evaluate workplace treatment and decision-making processes. These dimensions are generally categorized into four main types.
Distributive Justice evaluates how rewards and resources are allocated among individuals. Fair distribution is typically based on contributions and needs (Berkowitz, 1984). Distributive justice concerns how rewards, resources, and responsibilities are allocated within an organization. This dimension comes into play when individuals evaluate whether the distribution is equitable. Fair distribution can enhance employee motivation and job satisfaction (Adams, 1965). This type of justice is critical for ensuring employees perceive fairness in processes related to rewards and recognition. Procedural justice assesses whether decision-making processes are fair. It requires these processes to be transparent, consistent, and impartial (Leventhal, 1980). Procedural justice pertains to the fairness of decision-making processes in terms of transparency, consistency, and impartiality. It focuses on how decisions are made and the extent to which these processes adhere to principles of fairness. Procedural justice also involves employee participation in decision-making and feedback mechanisms (Leventhal, 1980). Procedural justice focuses on how decisions are made and whether these processes are equitable for all individuals. Interactional justice evaluates how individuals are treated and the behavior directed toward them. It pertains to respect and transparency in interpersonal interactions (Bies & Moag, 1986). Interactional justice encompasses individuals’ perceptions of how they are treated in interpersonal interactions within the organization. This includes fair communication, respect, and emotional support. Interactional justice plays a critical role in ensuring employees feel valued and respected (Colquitt et al., 2015). This type of justice often relates to whether individuals feel their emotions and perspectives are acknowledged. Informational justice examines individuals’ access to information and how it is shared. Employees should have sufficient and accurate information about decisions that affect them (Folger & Cropanzano, 1998). This type of justice includes the equitable distribution of information and maintaining transparency.
Turnover intention refers to an employee’s tendency and thought process regarding leaving their current workplace. This concept is critical for understanding the relationship between employees’ thoughts about quitting and their actual intention to leave. The turnover intention model developed by Tett & Meyer (1993) focuses on two main dimensions influencing an employee’s decision to quit: job satisfaction and organizational commitment. This model suggests that turnover intention is directly linked to factors such as job satisfaction, workload, and organizational commitment.
Turnover intention is not only connected to the act of leaving a job but also reflects the general attitude of employees toward their workplace. It is often triggered by factors like job dissatisfaction, low organizational commitment, insufficient rewards, or poor working conditions (Tett & Meyer, 1993). Understanding turnover intention is essential for employers to develop strategies aimed at reducing employee turnover rates and managing the workforce effectively. By identifying the factors influencing turnover intention, organizations can take steps to improve the workplace environment and enhance employee satisfaction (Meyer & Allen, 1991). Turnover intention reflects employees’ desire to leave their current jobs, including planning or thinking about it. This concept is generally closely associated with organizational commitment and job satisfaction and is considered a key factor influencing an employee’s decision to stay or leave (Hom & Griffeth, 1995). Turnover intention is shaped by changes in job satisfaction, perceptions of organizational justice, workload, leadership style, and individual characteristics (Mowday et al., 1979).
Turnover intention refers to the desire of employees to leave their organizations and can be categorized into various types. These classifications are significant for understanding the reasons behind turnover intention and how employees experience this inclination. Lack of job satisfaction and poor performance are key factors influencing turnover intention. When employees are dissatisfied with their jobs or exhibit low performance, their inclination to leave the organization may increase. Such turnover intentions often emerge in situations where organizational justice is perceived to be lacking (Huselid, 1995). Employees may develop turnover intentions when they perceive a lack of career advancement opportunities or professional growth. A deficiency in career satisfaction and development prospects may drive employees to consider alternative job opportunities (Ng et al., 2005). Factors such as personal life circumstances, family responsibilities, or lifestyle changes can lead to turnover intentions. These types of intentions are related to non-work factors and often arise independently of the organizational context (Maertz & Campion, 1998). Workplace conflicts and leadership problems can contribute to turnover intentions. Poor management and ineffective leadership styles, in particular, may increase employees’ desire to leave. These intentions are often pronounced in environments where organizational justice is perceived as deficient (Gerstner & Day, 1997). Economic downturns or changes in the labor market can influence turnover intentions. Employees may evaluate job changes based on job security and prevailing economic conditions (Lee et al., 2004).
Organizational dissent refers to the criticisms and opposing views expressed by individuals or groups regarding practices, policies, or managerial decisions within an organization (Korkmaz & Bektaş, 2023). This concept reflects employees’ sensitivity to and reactions against injustices, inequalities, and dissatisfaction within the workplace (Morrison & Milliken, 2000). Organizational dissent can manifest both explicitly and implicitly; explicit dissent is expressed directly and openly, whereas implicit dissent is conveyed through more covert and indirect means. According to Kassing (1998) and Kassing (2000), organizational dissent plays a critical role in enabling employees to voice their concerns and challenge organizational norms, fostering both constructive feedback and, potentially, conflict.
Kassing (1998) and Kassing (2000) developed a comprehensive model of organizational dissent, focusing on how employees choose to express their disagreements. His model identifies three primary dimensions of dissent, which are influenced by contextual factors, such as the perceived safety of dissent, the quality of relationships within the organization, and the organizational climate:
1. Upward Dissent: This involves employees expressing their concerns or disagreements directly to supervisors or managers. This form of dissent is typically characterized by constructive feedback and a willingness to engage in dialogue. It is often employed when employees perceive their supervisors as approachable and the organizational climate as supportive of open communication.
2. Lateral Dissent: This occurs when employees express dissent to their peers or colleagues rather than to management. Lateral dissent often arises when employees feel that addressing management would be ineffective or risky. It can serve as a form of social support or as a way to gauge the opinions of others before taking further action.
3. Displaced Dissent: This type of dissent occurs outside the organization, where employees voice their concerns to external parties such as family, friends, or even on public platforms. Displaced dissent often reflects a lack of trust in organizational leadership or fear of retaliation for expressing dissent internally.
This type of dissent can affect the organization’s performance and is often directly linked to perceptions of organizational justice. Employees tend to exhibit dissent when they perceive situations as unjust, which can also increase their intention to leave the organization (Greenberg, 1990). Kassing (1998) further highlights that dissent arises as a function of employees’ assessments of the risks and benefits associated with expressing their dissatisfaction, emphasizing the nuanced dynamics involved in dissent communication.
In Figure 1, the research model aims to reveal the direct effect of organizational justice on the intention to leave the job and the mediating role of organizational dissent in this relationship. The model includes three main variables:
Independent Variable (X): Perception of Organizational Justice
Dependent Variable (Y): Intention to Leave the Job
Mediating Variable (M): Organizational Dissent
While examining the direct effect of the perception of organizational justice on employees’ intention to leave the job, it is also evaluated whether organizational dissent mediates this effect. The research model will investigate how the effect of the perception of organizational justice on the intention to leave the job changes through the mediation of organizational dissent. This model demonstrates not only the direct effect of organizational justice on the intention to leave the job but also the mediating role of organizational dissent. The hypotheses formulated based on the literature are as follows:
H1: There is a relationship between organizational justice and the intention to leave the job.
H2: There is a relationship between organizational justice and organizational dissent.
H3: There is a relationship between organizational dissent and intention to leave the organization.
H4: Organizational dissent plays a mediating role in the relationship between organizational justice and intention to leave the organization.
2. Method
The data collection tool used in this study is the survey method. Surveys are a reliable and valid method for measuring employees’ perceptions of organizational justice, intention to leave, and levels of organizational dissent. The survey questions were adapted from previously conducted studies.
Demographic Questions: The survey includes a total of six questions covering gender, age, marital status, education level, and length of employment.
Organizational Justice Scale: This scale consists of 20 items measured on a 5-point Likert scale. It was developed by Niehoff & Moorman (1993), with a reliability coefficient of 0.90. The scale was translated into Turkish and used in the study of Akça (2012).
Intention to Leave Scale: This scale consists of three items measured on a 5-point Likert scale. It was developed by Cammann et al. (1983) and validated in Turkish by Mimaroğlu (2008).
Organizational Dissent Scale: This scale consists of 17 items measured on a 5-point Likert scale. It was developed by Kassing (2000) and adapted into Turkish by Dağlı (2015). It includes dimensions of horizontal, vertical, and displaced dissent.
The research population consisted of white-collar employees working in companies operating in Turkey’s technology sector. The sample was created using a random sampling method with a sufficiently large size to ensure the generalizability of the findings. Cohen et al. (2007) emphasized that sample size is crucial for the reliability of statistical analyses. In determining the sample size, several formulas have been developed. If the researcher is sufficiently familiar with the population from which the sample will be drawn to estimate the standard deviation of the relevant characteristic, can decide on an acceptable margin of error, and selects the confidence level that indicates the probability of the result falling within the specified error range, the sample size can be numerically determined (Sencer, 1989). In cases where the population size is unknown, the following formula is used to determine the sample size (Özdamar, 2003). According to this, the minimum sample size is 384 participants.
The collected data were analyzed using statistical methods. To test the relationships between organizational justice, turnover intention, and organizational dissent, regression analysis and mediation effect testing (Baron & Kenny, 1986) were applied. Additionally, statistical techniques such as the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test were employed to examine the normality of data distribution, alongside correlation and regression analyses. For data analysis, IBM SPSS v26 statistical software was utilized.
The obtained data were analyzed using percentage and frequency methods, and the results were presented and evaluated in tabular form. Exploratory factor analysis was performed to ensure scale validity, followed by a reliability analysis. Correlation and hierarchical regression analyses were conducted to test the research model. Based on the sample size (n = 402) and the results of the correlation analysis conducted after factor analysis, the values were found to be significant and sufficient for the study.
3. Findings
Table 1 presents the distribution of participants based on their gender, age, marital status, educational background, internal organizational experience, and total work experience.
The reliability analysis results presented in Table 2 demonstrate that the obtained coefficients satisfy the minimum threshold of 0.60 as suggested in the literature (Cronbach, 1990; Punch, 2005). Consequently, the scales and dimensions used in the study exhibit high internal consistency.
Variables | Frequency | Percentage | |
n | % | ||
Gender | Female | 198 | 49.3 |
Male | 204 | 50.7 | |
Age | 18-25 | 69 | 17.2 |
26-40 | 167 | 41.5 | |
41-60 | 103 | 25.6 | |
60 + | 63 | 15.7 | |
Marital Status | Single | 160 | 39.8 |
Married | 242 | 60.2 | |
Educational Background | High school or below | 82 | 20.4 |
Associate/Bachelor’s | 119 | 29.6 | |
Postgraduate | 201 | 50.0 | |
Internal Experience | Less than 5 years | 79 | 19.7 |
5-10 years | 124 | 30.8 | |
11-15 years | 199 | 49.5 | |
Total Experience | Less than 5 years | 69 | 17.2 |
5-10 years | 130 | 32.3 | |
11-15 years | 203 | 50.5 | |
Scale | Number of Items | Reliability Coefficient | Scale | Number of Items | Reliability Coefficient |
Interactional Justice | 9 | 0.946 | Turnover Intention | 3 | 0.902 |
Procedural Justice | 6 | 0.931 | Vertical Dissent | 9 | 0.928 |
Distributive Justice | 5 | 0.881 | Horizontal Dissent | 8 | 0.930 |
Organizational Justice | 20 | 0.947 | Organizational Dissent | 17 | 0.946 |
In this study, the normality of the distributions of the scales used was assessed using Skewness and Kurtosis values, along with P-P Plot graphics, via the SPSS program. One of the statistical methods used to assess univariate normality is the examination of skewness and kurtosis coefficients. It is considered that the distribution does not show excessive deviation from normality if these values are within the range of ±2.0. The Skewness and Kurtosis values are presented in Table 3.
According to the test results, the variables are found to have values within the range of ±2.0, indicating that they follow a normal distribution.
Variable | Skewness | Kurtosis |
Interactional Justice | -0.873 | 0.928 |
Procedural Justice | -0.623 | 0.220 |
Distributive Justice | -0.667 | 0.666 |
Organizational Justice | -0.652 | 0.358 |
Turnover Intention | -0.633 | 0.051 |
Vertical Dissent | -0.685 | 0.134 |
Horizontal Dissent | -0.704 | 0.262 |
Organizational Dissent | -0.735 | 0.423 |
The relationships between variables were examined using Pearson correlation coefficients based on participant data. The Pearson correlation coefficients presented in Table 4 indicate the relationships between the research variables, providing insights into the direction and strength of these relationships.
Variables | Mean | Std. Dev. | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
1. Interactional Justice | 39.505 | 0.79922 | 1 | |||||||
2. Procedural Justice | 37.699 | 0.86777 | 0.614** | 1 | ||||||
3. Distributive Justice | 38.109 | 0.84386 | 0.467** | 0.564** | 1 | |||||
4. Organizational Justice | 38.614 | 0.69958 | 0.783** | 0.758** | 0.751** | 1 | ||||
5. Turnover Intention | 38.076 | 0.91296 | -0.595** | -0.633** | -0.488** | -0.688** | 1 | |||
6. Vertical Dissent | 37.084 | 0.90124 | 0.497** | 0.693** | 0.609** | 0.697** | 0.601** | 1 | ||
7. Horizontal Dissent | 38.579 | 0.79066 | 0.629** | 0.669** | 0.555** | 0.739** | 0.733** | 0.650** | 1 | |
8. Organizational Dissent | 37.788 | 0.77258 | 0.609** | 0.750** | 0.643** | 0.786** | 0.772** | 0.731** | 0.783** | 1 |
The results of the correlation analysis presented in Table 4 indicate significant relationships among the variables (p < 0.01). All correlation coefficients are positive, demonstrating strong relationships between the variables.
Interactional justice shows significant and positive correlations with other variables. Notably, it has strong correlations with organizational justice (r = 0.783), turnover intention (r = -0.595), vertical dissent (r = 0.497), horizontal dissent (r = 0.629), and organizational dissent (r = 0.609). Procedural justice also exhibits high correlations with other types of justice and dissent behaviors. The strongest relationships are observed with organizational justice (r = 0.758) and organizational dissent (r = 0.750). Additionally, it shows significant correlations with vertical dissent (r = 0.693), horizontal dissent (r = 0.669), and turnover intention (r = -0.633). Distributive justice has moderate correlations with other variables. The strongest correlation is with organizational justice (r = 0.751), and it also has significant relationships with organizational dissent (r = 0.643), vertical dissent (r = 0.609), and turnover intention (r = -0.488). Organizational justice demonstrates the highest correlation with organizational dissent (r = 0.786). It also has strong correlations with horizontal dissent (r = 0.739), turnover intention (r = -0.688), and vertical dissent (r = 0.697). Turnover intention has strong correlations with other variables, particularly with organizational dissent (r = 0.772), horizontal dissent (r = 0.733), and organizational justice (r = -0.688). Vertical dissent exhibits high correlations with procedural justice (r = 0.693), organizational justice (r = 0.697), and organizational dissent (r = 0.731). Horizontal dissent demonstrates strong positive relationships with other types of dissent and justice perceptions. The highest correlation is with organizational dissent (r = 0.783), followed by organizational justice (r = 0.739) and turnover intention (r = 0.733). Finally, organizational dissent shows the strongest relationships with other variables. The highest correlation is with organizational justice (r = 0.786), followed by horizontal dissent (r = 0.783) and turnover intention (r = 0.772).
In summary, all variables are significantly and strongly correlated, with organizational justice and organizational dissent exhibiting the strongest relationships with other variables. These findings highlight the close connection between justice perceptions, dissent behaviors, turnover intention, and other organizational attitudes. Accordingly, hypotheses H1, H2, and H3 are supported.
To empirically test the hypotheses presented within the theoretical framework, a hierarchical regression analysis was conducted. The study model assumes that the variables included (interactional justice, procedural justice, distributive justice, organizational justice, turnover intention, vertical dissent, horizontal dissent, and organizational dissent) can explain the causal relationships among these variables.
To determine the mediating effect of organizational dissent on the relationship between organizational justice and turnover intention, the three-step regression analysis method proposed by Baron & Kenny (1986) was applied. This process involves, conducting a regression analysis between the independent variable (organizational justice) and the mediating variable (organizational dissent) to establish whether a significant relationship exists, examining the causal relationship between the independent variable (organizational justice) and the dependent variable (turnover intention), performing a regression analysis controlling for the mediating variable (organizational dissent) to assess its influence on the dependent variable (turnover intention).
To determine the existence of a mediating effect, it is essential to evaluate the changes in the influence of the independent variable (organizational justice) on the dependent variable (turnover intention) during the second step. If the effect diminishes but remains significant, a “partial mediation effect” is indicated. If the effect disappears entirely, a “full mediation effect” is suggested. Additionally, the relationship between the mediating variable (organizational dissent) and the dependent variable (turnover intention) must remain significant.
For this purpose, hierarchical regression analysis was applied while testing the research model. Table 5 presents the results of the hierarchical regression analysis conducted for the study model.
Model | Variables | Unstandardized β | Std. Error (Unstd.) | Std. β | F | p |
Model 1 | Interactional Justice | -0.405 | 0.187 | - | 123.072 | *** |
Procedural Justice | -0.154 | 0.076 | 0.147 | *** | ||
Distributive Justice | -0.044 | 0.061 | -0.041 | *** | ||
Organizational Justice | -0.774 | 0.118 | 0.593 | *** | ||
Model 2 | Interactional Justice | -0.148 | 0.144 | - | 193.034 | *** |
Procedural Justice | -0.025 | 0.060 | 0.024 | *** | ||
Distributive Justice | -0.081 | 0.047 | -0.074 | *** | ||
Organizational Justice | -0.219 | 0.094 | 0.168 | *** | ||
Vertical Dissent | 0.062 | 0.043 | 0.061 | *** | ||
Horizontal Dissent | 0.801 | 0.048 | 0.694 | *** | ||
Organizational Dissent | 0.197 | 0.069 | 0.167 | *** |
The hierarchical regression analysis results presented in Table 5 were used to evaluate the effects of the variables included in the research model on the dependent variable. Two different models were examined, and the impact of each variable was analyzed. The R² values obtained for both Model 1 and Model 2 were found to be significant, indicating the level of variance in the dependent variable explained by the independent variables.
In Model 1, only perceptions of justice (interactional, procedural, distributive, and organizational justice) were used as independent variables. Among these, organizational justice had the strongest effect (β = -0.593, p < 0.05), indicating a very strong influence on the dependent variable. Interactional justice also showed a significant effect (β = -0.405), but it was not as strong as organizational justice. Procedural justice exhibited a positive and significant effect (β = -0.147), albeit at a lower level. Although distributive justice showed a negative effect (β = -0.041), its significance was observed, but the strength of its effect was very weak. The overall explanatory power of the model (R2 = 0.481) was relatively high, indicating that the independent variables explained 48.1% of the variance in the dependent variable. This highlights the substantial impact of justice perceptions on the dependent variable.
In Model 2, in addition to perceptions of justice, types of dissent (vertical dissent, horizontal dissent, and organizational dissent) were included in the model. In this model, organizational justice continued to have a significant and negative effect on the dependent variable (β = -0.168), although its effect was reduced compared to Model 1. Horizontal dissent had the strongest effect among all variables in the model (β = 0.694, p < 0.05), indicating that perceptions of horizontal dissent played a crucial role in influencing the dependent variable. Organizational dissent also had a significant positive effect (β = 0.167), but its impact was not as strong as horizontal dissent. Vertical dissent exhibited a weaker but still significant effect (β = 0.061). Interactional justice showed a negative effect in this model and lost its significance. The overall explanatory power of the model (R² = 0.709) increased compared to Model 1, indicating that the independent variables explained 70.9% of the variance in the dependent variable. Furthermore, the increase in explanatory power (ΔR2 = 0.228) was found to be significant, demonstrating that adding dissent variables to the model significantly enhanced the explained variance. Based on these findings, the H4 hypothesis is supported.
In conclusion, perceptions of justice and types of dissent have significant effects on the dependent variables, and the relationships among them are strong. The explanatory power of Model 2 increased substantially with the inclusion of dissent variables.
4. Discussion, Conclusion and Recommendations
This study examines the impact of employees’ perceptions of organizational justice on turnover intention and the mediating role of organizational dissent in this relationship. It is significant for understanding the critical role of organizational justice in job satisfaction and commitment and identifying the factors influencing turnover intention. Conducted specifically in the technology sector, this research holds value in comprehending the dynamics unique to the industry.
The research was conducted between January and May 2024 in technology firms located in Istanbul, with the participation of 402 white-collar employees. The diversity and dynamism of Istanbul’s technology sector enable the findings to provide sector-specific insights. The findings reveal that perceptions of organizational justice have an inverse effect on turnover intention. Lower perceptions of organizational justice increase turnover intentions among employees. Furthermore, organizational dissent was found to mediate this process. In other words, while low organizational justice perceptions amplify turnover intentions, organizational dissent strengthens this relationship (Ambrose & Schminke, 2003; Colquitt et al., 2015). The literature includes numerous studies supporting the effect of organizational justice on turnover intention. For example, Colquitt et al. (2015) highlighted the significant impact of organizational justice on job satisfaction and commitment. Ambrose & Schminke (2003) also provided important findings on the effects of organizational dissent on turnover intention. While this study supports existing literature, it contributes to it by emphasizing the mediating role of organizational dissent.
Analysis results indicate that demographic factors such as gender and marital status influence these variables, though some other demographic factors do not show statistically significant effects. Gender-based analyses found no significant differences between variables like interactional, procedural, distributive, and organizational justice perceptions or turnover intentions among participants. Interactional justice perceptions were similar between male and female participants, but males demonstrated higher levels of vertical dissent. This suggests that men exhibit a more pronounced tendency toward vertical dissent, which aligns with literature stating that men are more competitive and hierarchical in behavior (Kozlowski & Klein, 2000). The higher vertical dissent among men implies that power dynamics and hierarchy play a more prominent role in their workplace behaviors. Conversely, women’s dissent attitudes were less pronounced, potentially reflecting the influence of social norms and gender roles in workplace interactions. Women’s tendency to behave more harmoniously at work can be seen as a reflection of societal gender roles (Eagly & Carli, 2003). Analyses across age groups revealed no significant differences in justice perceptions or dissent behaviors. This finding suggests that age does not directly influence justice perceptions or dissent attitudes in the workplace. However, workplace experiences among different age groups might indirectly impact justice perceptions. Similar results were observed regarding years of work experience, hinting that organizational structure and culture play a more significant role in shaping individuals’ justice perceptions. Marital status analyses revealed significant differences in justice perceptions and dissent behaviors between single and married participants. Single participants exhibited higher values in procedural justice, distributive justice, and organizational justice and had higher turnover intentions. These findings suggest that single individuals may be more sensitive to justice perceptions in the workplace, whereas marital responsibilities may influence married individuals’ workplace perceptions. Higher turnover intentions among single individuals could be explained by efforts to balance work-life or career-oriented factors. Educational background analyses showed significant differences in justice perceptions and dissent behaviors across education levels. Participants with a high school education or lower exhibited higher justice perceptions compared to associate and bachelor’s degree holders. This finding may suggest that individuals with higher education levels evaluate workplace justice more critically. Increased education appears to enhance individuals’ understanding of justice and their ability to grasp complex social dynamics. The impact of education on dissent behaviors is also noteworthy. Postgraduate degree holders displayed lower levels of vertical dissent compared to high school, associate, and bachelor’s degree holders. This finding indicates that individuals with higher education levels tend to exhibit fewer dissent behaviors, possibly due to greater alignment with organizational goals. Correlation analyses between variables demonstrated significant relationships between interactional justice and other variables. In particular, a strong relationship with organizational justice underscores the interconnectedness of justice perceptions and the importance of a holistic justice framework within organizations. These findings suggest that organizational justice influences employees’ dissent behaviors and turnover intentions. Justice perceptions affect employees’ satisfaction and commitment, contributing to organizational objectives (Colquitt, 2001).
This study highlights significant relationships between justice perceptions and dissent behaviors. Demographic variables such as gender, marital status, and educational background were found to influence these relationships. Strengthening justice perceptions in workplaces is essential to enhancing employee motivation and reducing dissent behaviors. Effective strategies include promoting a culture where justice is clearly communicated, strengthening communication, and considering employees’ opinions.
Future research can explore the effects of these variables in different sectors and organizational contexts for a more comprehensive understanding. Additionally, qualitative studies can provide deeper insights into participants’ justice perceptions. Enhancing workplace justice perceptions can contribute to long-term organizational success. Future studies could examine similar variables across different sectors and geographic regions to improve generalizability. Exploring other factors influencing the relationship between organizational justice and dissent can provide a broader perspective. Longitudinal studies could evaluate changes in these relationships over time (Cropanzano & Wright, 2001).
This research contributes to understanding the effects of organizational justice perceptions on turnover intention and the mediating role of organizational dissent in the context of the technology sector. The findings emphasize the impact of organizational justice on job satisfaction and commitment while clearly highlighting the role of organizational dissent in this process. These insights offer valuable information for practitioners and managers when making strategic decisions (Folger & Cropanzano, 1998).
The data used to support the research findings are available from the corresponding author upon request.
This article is based on Burcin Yigit’s thesis “The mediating role of organisational opposition in the effect of organisational justice perception on turnover intention” which is supervised by Dr. Ali Özcan with support from Dr. Ahmet Erkasap and Derya Altiparmak.
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Views: 236